• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Our Beliefs and Attacking Ignorance

Thomas savage

Grand Contributor
The Watchman
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
10,260
Likes
16,298
Location
uk, taunton
Very true and I have been guilty of some of the behaviours you note from existing members, always good to have somebody point out when the line is crossed.

On the other hand, the growth is attracting the trolls and I have a strong hatred of the troll. Yes, it plays into their game, I know, but it's a bit like watching someone pissing on your lawn and doing nothing about it if left unchallenged.
I'd wait and see what happened to the grass , it might help..


Otherwise novichok on their front door handle seems a appropriate and fair response.
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City
I suppose another, more difficult, guideline is to limit our claims. I've always found in climate science discussion the essential truths about man-made warming get buried (almost entirely by journalists, activists and politicians) in less supportable predictions of immediate catastrophe. These predictions become conflated with the science and damage its credibility to the less careful, or simply motivated, listener.

In our world, simply remembering to qualify our nihilistic-sounding claims can help. All amps don't sound alike, all amps that measure similarly within audible thresholds will be impossible to distinguish in blind comparison, etc. The former is the straw man that they burn on the subjectivist sites to dismiss objective approaches.
 

Robin L

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
5,213
Likes
7,593
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
This is known as presuppositional apologetics in both philosophy, apologetics and theology. As well modern science is coming to terms w/ what the previous mentioned schools of thought have been shouting from the rooftops for some millennium: https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2021-01/tud-whw010821.php

What a person believes beforehand really matters. So many in every area of life deny this. I mean in Apologetics Evolutionist vs Creationist look at the same evidence but have quite different narratives they'll defend to the death. In audiophile we witness the same thing. Lord knows this happens in the study of theology. And now neuroscience has confirmed what is. Nobody is truly Agnostic - if that is desirable. I mean when an axiom or premise is true..... an agnostic just learns for themselves what was already true for themselves - they reinvent the wheel.
This is really interesting. I started out in audio nearly 50 years ago. This is before digital, decent sounding cassette decks were just starting to appear. I heard reel-to-reel, but that wasn't really something I heard a lot of. So, when I started, LPs were the best thing going. I bought LPs constantly, understood that some companies [Philips, DGG] had good pressings, good surfaces, others did not. So, when I first got involved with digital, I was working from the assumption that there was something wrong with the sound of anything digital. My mind was looking for things to tear apart. When CDs first appeared, the High-End publications I was reading told me that CDs were inferior, so my personal prejudices were being reinforced.

It wasn't until about ten years ago that my personal affective filters of sound could clearly hear the faults of LP playback. That had a boomerang effect---it's always harder to unlearn something than to learn it. Making needledrops for others, where I had to listen to music I disliked, so all I could really hear were the faults of reproduction, pushed that change in my 'hearing' much further. I wouldn't go back to LPs if you gave me a fully loaded brand new Technics 1200 with all the trimmings for free. But for years I "knew" LPs were better because that was the set of assumptions I had when comparing LPs to [then] CDs. And maybe for a few years [1983-1993 or so] LPs had a few [potential] sonic advantages over CDs. But If I was born in 1970 and got interested in audio in 1985, it probably would have gone the other way.
 
Last edited:

JustJones

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Messages
1,726
Likes
2,391
I'm not an engineer or have a background in science which is why I read a lot of articles and threads here before joining or posting. Unless a new member has a pressing question they need help on it's worth starting in the New member technical forum. I think it was fairly obvious the aforementioned Martin 13th had an agenda which the mod appropriately stepped in and closed the thread.
 

bryanl9581

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 11, 2021
Messages
14
Likes
19
As a newbie that spent a few years in the subjectivist camp before discovering this forum (thanks YouTube), I have a few comments.

All the knowledge here can be presented as a positive and not a negative to subjectivists. As an example, I was happy to learn that I don't have to spend a ton of money on a whole bunch of things that don't matter and instead focus my budget on what does matter. This is great news! It will be hard to hear for some objectivists, but they can still have a lot of fun trying out different speaker designs and still scratch that subjectivist itch.

By the way, what does matter? I know speakers do, but I have had a hard time figuring out what else does matter based on the science done on this forum. I know the story on cables, USB purifiers, power conditioners, etc., but I am not sure what the consensus is here on things like linear power supplies, preamps, re-clocking devices, resisters/capacitors/inductors, and some posts in this string imply that DACs may still be up for debate. What is considered "settled science" on ASR in terms of all the components in the audio chain, source to speakers? One thing that would be a great help for newbies and an idea for a sticky is a shorthand list of generally accepted principles based on all the research. Apologies if this already exists!

One piece of gear that has already paid for itself is an ABX Comparator made by Van Alstine. I can instantly switch between two sources, two amps, and three sets of speakers in any combination and run blind tests. This is not a commercial; I have no affiliation with them other than as a happy customer. It has already saved me a lot of money and completely contradicted the generally accepted viewpoints of some well-known YouTube reviewers about two different amplifiers.
 

HiFidFan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 22, 2021
Messages
723
Likes
906
Location
U.S.A
. . .Unless a new member has a pressing question they need help on it's worth starting in the New member technical forum. . .

Where is this "New Member Technical Forum"? And why isn't it stickied at the very top of the ASR Forum homepage?

. . .One thing that would be a great help for newbies and an idea for a sticky is a shorthand list of generally accepted principles based on all the research. Apologies if this already exists!

If it does exist I can't find it. Great idea.
 

GGroch

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 7, 2018
Messages
1,059
Likes
2,049
Location
Denver, Colorado
.......Being a science based forum, we seem to easily forget, science is ever evolving.......So when someone says they hear a difference in a device, I may not believe it to be true. But rather than attack them on their subjective results (beliefs), i will just take what they have said with a grain of salt.....

Right, science is evolving, but there is not universal agreement that science is the best way to approach every topic. Subjectivists have a strong argument that measurements do not incorporate everything that matters to audiophiles and their enjoyment of what is a hobby that focuses on enjoyment of an art. A purely scientific comparison of the relative quality of Rembrandt vs Picasso might rank Rembrandt as far superior because many Picasso portraits have the wrong number of eyes.;)

DACs were mentioned earlier. They are a good example of the issue because they are so near perfect that audible differences are tiny or inaudible. A subjective audiophile, joined and started a thread here yesterday discussing mostly DACs. It did not go well. Most responses were that subjective opinions of DACS were useless without DB tests. One posted posited that subjective reviews of anything, including speakers has little worth.

Does this mean that the enjoyment audio hobbyist gets from DACs is totally based on measurement? Is the experience of owning and using a Topping D10 superior to the experience one gets from an SPL Phonitor X because the D10 measures better? If that's true, then going forward the primary utility of DAC reviews here is to spot the dwindling few DACs that measure poorly. That is not sufficient in itself for me to make buying decisions. I love measurement....but I like hearing about the functions, technology, brand story, build quality, and yes, subjective listening impressions too. In the real world all of these factors impact our own listening experiences. If you are into gear, my guess is that the experience of owning and using an SPL Phonitor is more fun than a D10. At least until you see the measurements;)

My point is that how much science and measurement matter to audio hobbyists is disputed and rejecting that is not objective. If you believe the only goal of audio gear is to reproduce the original recorded signal as accurately as possible, then science is #1. If you believe that subjective enjoyment of your system and the music is most important, then we should be open to the concept that science may not be the only valid methodology. I think you can put value in both approaches.
 

Doodski

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 9, 2019
Messages
20,753
Likes
20,784
Location
Canada
we seem to easily forget, science is ever evolving. What is considered standard testing now, may not be the standard in the near future. There may very well be new test practices that we look at and say "how or why did we not know that back then". In other words, we may currently believe, there should be no difference in the sound of a device based on specs and verified measurements, quite possibly may not hold to be true down the road.
I doubt that but it's good to see a optimist. :D

After all, almost anything is possible.
I doubt that too. :D
 

sergeauckland

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,440
Likes
9,100
Location
Suffolk UK
My point is that how much science and measurement matter to audio hobbyists is disputed and rejecting that is not objective. If you believe the only goal of audio gear is to reproduce the original recorded signal as accurately as possible, then science is #1. If you believe that subjective enjoyment of your system and the music is most important, then we should be open to the concept that science may not be the only valid methodology. I think you can put value in both approaches.

I do. To the latter, I assign zero value. That's still a value!

S.
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City
My point is that how much science and measurement matter to audio hobbyists is disputed and rejecting that is not objective. I

That came up repeatedly in the thread, in which I was involved. For myself, I tried hard to restrict my claims to *strictly audible* differences, emphasized in that way, or in all caps. There's really zero point, with respect to this forum, in discussing how the Primaluna's illuminated-phalluses-in-a-pantheon looks affected the reviewer's listening pleasure. We all know it did, and most of us don't care much.
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City
o when someone say's they can hear a difference in a device, i may not believe it to be true. But rather than attack them on their subjective results (beliefs), i will just take what they have said with a grain of salt, so to speak. Having and hearing different opinions is what keeps us asking questions and not just accepting what we are told to believe. After all, almost anything is possible. I will continue to strive to keep an open mind if i feel someone is being genuine and not trying to peddle some nonsense to sell a product.

Actually, confirming exactly this is very helpful to persuasion. And, indeed, it would be exciting to discover unmeasurable yet audible differences. The fact that we assign lottery-winning probabilities to such an outcome needn't be a hindrance.
 

murraycamp

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
421
Likes
647
ASR is about to explode in hits and newbies.
Don't disagree and as an ASR fan I think that's great, but what leads you to that conclusion? Just curious, Thanks.
 

HiFidFan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 22, 2021
Messages
723
Likes
906
Location
U.S.A

Thanks for the links.

However, someone new to this site might have a bit of a challenge finding either (I speak from experience)

Here's another one. . .

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-for-the-first-time.17598/page-40#post-712738

IMO, it would go a long way if a "Welcome To ASR!" or some such PROMINENT sticky/banner/link, whatever, was FRONT and CENTER on the ASR Forums homepage. Include the links above and the ASR Mission statement. Why not make it as easy as possible for newbies/lurkers to get the 'lay of the land'?
 

murraycamp

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
421
Likes
647
science is ever evolving
Not disagreeing with this as far as this goes. But at least on the electronics side, seems to me that the EE is relatively settled as are general audibility thresholds. Transducers, of course, are a whole different talk show.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,700
Right, science is evolving, but there is not universal agreement that science is the best way to approach every topic. Subjectivists have a strong argument that measurements do not incorporate everything that matters to audiophiles and their enjoyment of what is a hobby that focuses on enjoyment of an art. A purely scientific comparison of the relative quality of Rembrandt vs Picasso might rank Rembrandt as far superior because many Picasso portraits have the wrong number of eyes.;)

DACs were mentioned earlier. They are a good example of the issue because they are so near perfect that audible differences are tiny or inaudible. A subjective audiophile, joined and started a thread here yesterday discussing mostly DACs. It did not go well. Most responses were that subjective opinions of DACS were useless without DB tests. One posted posited that subjective reviews of anything, including speakers has little worth.

Does this mean that the enjoyment audio hobbyist gets from DACs is totally based on measurement? Is the experience of owning and using a Topping D10 superior to the experience one gets from an SPL Phonitor X because the D10 measures better? If that's true, then going forward the primary utility of DAC reviews here is to spot the dwindling few DACs that measure poorly. That is not sufficient in itself for me to make buying decisions. I love measurement....but I like hearing about the functions, technology, brand story, build quality, and yes, subjective listening impressions too. In the real world all of these factors impact our own listening experiences. If you are into gear, my guess is that the experience of owning and using an SPL Phonitor is more fun than a D10. At least until you see the measurements;)

My point is that how much science and measurement matter to audio hobbyists is disputed and rejecting that is not objective. If you believe the only goal of audio gear is to reproduce the original recorded signal as accurately as possible, then science is #1. If you believe that subjective enjoyment of your system and the music is most important, then we should be open to the concept that science may not be the only valid methodology. I think you can put value in both approaches.
Seemed to turn into a discussion about cooking fish. Which was really odd.
 

murraycamp

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
421
Likes
647
Not disagreeing with this as far as this goes. But at least on the electronics side, seems to me that the EE is relatively settled as are general audibility thresholds. Transducers, of course, are a whole different talk show.

Edit: Posted this before I saw @Pluto 's comment above - which is better stated anyway.
 

murraycamp

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
421
Likes
647

bryanl9581

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 11, 2021
Messages
14
Likes
19
Don't disagree and as an ASR fan I think that's great, but what leads you to that conclusion? Just curious, Thanks.
There are a lot of people who get gear reviews on various YouTube channels, and now that audience is seeing references to ASR based on the ASR YouTube channel. That is how I got here! When Danny Richie and Steve Guttenberg mention ASR by name, there is a lot of crossover traffic, some which may be permanent.
 
Top Bottom